本人移民調整身份申請（I-485）卡在了联邦調查局姓名調查 (name check) 这一关节已有2年多了。不少朋友有类似问题。最近发现 the American Civil Liberties Union Immigrations’ Rights Projects 在征求这方面信息 （请见详情如下）。该组织是非营利性质。他们正在为一件相关案件 起诉政府。如果您也为此事烦恼，请联系该组织 Cecilia Wang 律师 （415 343 0770 ext 772）。或email 本人代交 namecheck2006@hotmail.com。该组织需要征集更多信息来决定是不是将namecheck问题加入他们这个正在进行中的案件。希望团结大家力量用法律手段来解决这个移民难关。谢谢！
ACLU SEEKS ASSISTANCE IN SUIT AGAINST INS DISTRICT OFFICES
The American Civil Liberties Union Immigrants' Rights Project is seeking information to prepare an amicus brief for the US Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in a case involving exclusion proceedings against a lawful permanent resident.
Recently the Federal District Court in Chicago ruled that a lawful permanent resident in exclusion proceedings is entitled to an individualized parole hearing in from an immigration judge or other impartial adjudicator. The judge in the case found that the new Section 236(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act which allows INS district directors to solely decide to place someone in custody is an unconstitutional denial of due process.
The ACLU is seeking evidence for its brief to back up the contention that district directors are "structurally biased" and that district directors do not fully and adequately consider the merits of parole requests and routinely deny them in a cursory fashion.
The ACLU is asking that immigration advocacy organizations and immigration professionals provide information on the following questions to Cecilia Wang at 415-621-2493 x 16:
1. Has it been your experience that district directors routinely and typically treat parole requests in a cursory way, and deny them without due consideration of their individual merits?
2. How do district director parole determinations compare to immigration judge bond determinations, as far as the depth of the analysis and weighing of factors?
3. Does your organization have any actual district director parole denials that tend to demonstrate that district directors approach parole requests in a "cookie-cutter" or "rubber-stamp" manner; i.e. that district directors do not give each request individualized and careful consideration? Any such sample denials should be typical.
4. Does your organization have statistics on the frequency of district director grants of parole?
5. Would your organization be interested in signing onto the ACLU amicus brief?